Gas / Lithium / Lead. I like it. It's a complicated problem we have, and I don't think there's a simple solution.

Charles, you could have titled your article "All that was old will be new again".

One poster said no one needs a car that goes 0-60 in 4 seconds and has a 300 mile range. I don't know who would give up a 300 mile range. If EVs / hybrids are going to be viable, they have to give us something close to what we have now.

RalphyBoy, the answer to your question is below. The answer comes by e-mail from Subhash Dhar, CEO of Energy Power Systems. Note that Dhar cites the diminished need for thermal management. As we've reported many times, the National Academy of Engineering has estimated that about half the cost of today's lithium-ion battery packs lies in the packaging and thermal management system. Dhar is suggesting that some of that cost would be eliminated. See below.

Here is Dhar's response to your question:

"The Volt battery is designed for power and energy; it is assembled using three cells of 15 AH each in parallel to achieve 45 AH capacity; it also uses higher expensive conductive components to achieve power.

"In our hybrid battery the Li-Ion battery will not have parallel cells; these cells will be high energy cells without the need for higher power capability, which adds significant cost for thermal management.

"So the fewer number of higher capacity cells that do not have to deliver high power cost significantly less."

Most of the weight in a Lead Acid battery is the in the lead grid that supports the active chemicals. Firefly Energy tried to solve the weight problem by replacing the lead grid with a support made from carbon foam. They didn't succeed. I'm not sure of the reason. It might have been technical or it may have been the money ran out before all the details were worked out. They were a technology spinoff from Caterpillar Corp. They started out in Illinois and got a fair amount of support from private and government funding but still went belly up. A company in India bought the technology and as far as I know is still working to develop it.

oldtimer, the biggest problem is charging and balancing the cells thus the life of them. Most batteries don't die, they are murdered by over, undercharging or over discharging them. Sadly for the Bolder it wasn't very good at that.

You are right a big secret for not just lead batteries is low resistance interconnents and the paths to them from the active material. This cuts heat which causes most of lead batteries problems when not designed right/too cheap.

All lead batteries when fast charging, assuming good design, actually cool down until the 80%charge/gassing level. And don't slow down and even Bolders can explode. So while they like most lead batteries can charge as fast as they discharge, you have to be careful in the last 20%.

The Bolder or A123 are far superior to UC's in so many ways at a couple % of the UC's cost. Whenever I hear, read someone touting UC's I either see a con or gulible person as just not practical. Same about foolcells too.

Hey Charles... i had thought about what Jerry is proposing... that lower output batteries might be the answer, I just didn't think that those would be that much cheaper per kwh...

Jerry...

As for cost we have been buying EV size lithium cells for $450/kwhr for a couple yrs retail so I don't expect it's costing GM even that. Add $100/kwhr for making it into a pack and BMS and you are at $550/kwhr.

But the claim here was reduction from $800/kwh so that's the starting point of the GM Volt's batteries right now.

Anyway, I can see where using a lead-acid battery to apply some punch at the starting block and then drawing slow and steady from the Li cells might be a good way to go.

The original sub-c energy cell was rated for ~1 A/Hr with a discharge rate at 400 AMPS! That gave the Secure Start ( sold at Sears for the replacement for jumper cables in the trunk ) and the original Start Stick for aircraft the power. The cells could be recharged in minutes or seconds if you had the power generation capability...NO heat was generated during the charge/discharge cycle!

We had got the internal resistance and interconnects down to extremely low resistive levels by using wire braid on the cells interconnect system. Internal resistance was the problem with lead-acid technology; we had solved it with the TMF process and special winding machines.

As an aside, ROAR ( the R/C car association ) BANNED the Bolder Energy packs due to the power output they had. I still have a couple of the Bolder TMF R/C packs and the " energy cube " we made ( I'm looking at one now ) as well as my original SecureStart given to the employees as a Christmas Bonus....

I also was contacting the high power audio market to replace the capacitors used for smoothing the high current spikes of the multiple KILOWATTS of the car audio systems at that time.

I was thinking of the actual BATACITOR we created that was in SciFi literature of the time.

The military project was to build a 5 A/Hr energy cell that could be carried like a old fashioned cartridge belt you saw in the westerns. We were in the testing mode for these new energy cells when the company was outsourced. I know because I ran the Test Lab.

I had also worked on the Killacycle powerpack and " loaned " my XJ12 to test the product that became the SecureStart. That is how I got the 400 A figure.

On another robotics project, we worked on " intellegent forklifts " that could have their weight cut in half if Bolder Technology was still around.

One of the speculations I had was about the locomotives being able to use Bolder energy packs and the traction motors to save all the energy they wasted throwing away all that energy in the huge resistor grids on the top of the locomotives. That could save on the Diesel fuel consumption locomotives have.

The " what if " means that this conversation would have been happening over fifteen years ago.

First the pack is smaller in amphrs and likely in space because lower output lithium batts have a better wthr/lb by about 50% and generally cost less than high output ones.

Thus why having a hybrid pack helps by the lead batteries taking the power spikes, both acceleration and regen while being steadily charged by the lithium pack.

But I fail to see how with a smaller total amphr it can't lose EV range.

Interestingly just by switching the body to composites and cutting the engine down to 30hp range would about double from the weight savings!!

As for cost we have been buying EV size lithium cells for $450/kwhr for a couple yrs retail so I don't expect it's costing GM even that. Add $100/kwhr for making it into a pack and BMS and you are at $550/kwhr.

Yes Bolder was a great tech but while putting amazing power, it wasn't likely to live long from not being able to keep them balanced. But in larger sizes say 70-100amphr cells with a decent BMS and you'd have serious EV battery pack material.

IIRC Bolders were only 2-3amphr cells made for cordless power tool battery packs. I like them there better than NiCads!! I remember Bill using them in his Killacycle drag bike hitting 8 second 1/4 mile times or so with them.

Facts are the better you design the battery to get power in, out as fast as possible like the Bolder, Optima and Orbital lead batteries have and you get excellent specific power and if you don't starve it of electrolyte and make it refillable you get more range and life.

Sadly most lead battery companies skimp on the interconnects raise cell resistance, etc, just to save a few cents!!

On my belt pack I have to carry I want Lithium!! Same power at 1/2 the weight!!

Interestingly the best lead batteries are about the lowest cost/lb like golfcart or true deep cycle traction batteries by good companies like Deka/East Penn, Trojan, USBattery. Going rate about $1.30/lb. So the 500lb battery pack for my example for 100 mile range costs only $700 or about $100-$140/yr

Industrial workplaces are governed by OSHA rules, but this isn’t to say that rules are always followed. While injuries happen on production floors for a variety of reasons, of the top 10 OSHA rules that are most often ignored in industrial settings, two directly involve machine design: lockout/tagout procedures (LO/TO) and machine guarding.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.